BRIGHTON: Derided for its stubborn opposition to cricket's Decision Review System, the game's superpower now feels vindicated over its stance after watching a series of controversies mar the first two Tests of the Ashes series.

India's influence over the Asian cricket nations has been the stumbling block for the mandatory adoption of DRS technology across the international game, and it believes its inherent distrust of the way ball-tracking and Hot Spot are deployed has been proved right.

Former Indian captain Ravi Shastri (R) says India's concerns over the DRS have been vindicated, while ICC chief executive Dave Richardson (L) says many of the issues are valid.

A succession of howlers blotted Tests at Trent Bridge and Lord's, both won by England, while Australia's use of the review concept has come under attack.

Ravi Shastri, the former India captain who sits on the technical committee of the Board of Control for Cricket in India and is the media representative on the ICC Cricket Committee, argues the widespread criticism of his country's blunt and uncompromising position has been proved "absolutely" unfair.

Ashton Agar (L) talks to umpire Marais Erasmus as he leaves the field at Lord's after being ruled out caught behind despite Hot Spot not showing a mark. Photo: Reuters

"We don't need to say anything now," Shastri told Fairfax Media. "I've told a lot of people now in India when I've been asked, it's time to shut up, watch, listen and read ... because what [we] have said has been vindicated. I said two or three years ago, "Wait until the shit hits the roof in a massive series, then you watch what will happen.

"They don't have to open their mouths at all now. People can make their own judgment now, they've watched it."

Advertisement

From perplexing decisions and questions over accuracy to the admission of operator error and poor use by players, the umpiring and the review technology has been, short of Australia's freefall, a major talking point of the Ashes to date.

After the first Test at Trent Bridge, the ICC was even prompted to release umpiring statistics, admitting errors, with chief executive Dave Richardson conceding that "India have got good reasons [for opposing the DRS]".

It was fitting then that an umpire, Australian Simon Taufel, delivered the MCC Spirit of Cricket Cowdrey lecture at Lord's on Wednesday night.

Taufel, however, said the DRS was here to stay.

“The technology genie has been let out of the bottle and it's not going to go back in,” he said. “I would simply advocate that we look at ways to be as pragmatic as possible so we can get more correct decisions and deliver more justice.

“Perhaps we should be asking, 'Are we using technology in the best way to serve the players, supporters, umpires and values of our game?' ”

Steve Waugh, in his role on the Marylebone Cricket Club's World Cricket committee of esteemed former players, also endorses the use of technology in cricket.

"DRS has improved the game; it's made the decision-making more definitive and you're getting decisions more right than wrong," Waugh said at Lord's. "It' s a really good system that works exceptionally well in conjunction with really good umpiring. The DRS has got its place."

Former Australian captain Ian Chappell last week led a growing call for the review system to be left in the hands of umpires, not players, but Shastri said that was what India had been arguing all along.

"I'm all for technology but the way it is deployed leaves a lot of scope for improvement," he said.

"It's there to take the howler out of cricket, but all it's done is at times when it doesn't work it creates so much bloody confusion that it's not funny.

"I sit on the technical committee of the ICC and I've been there for the last three years. I've made my thoughts on DRS clear. Whatever I have said is well documented in the minutes of every meeting. I have not left one stone unturned there, let me assure you. As a technical committee member I'm not allowed to speak on that, but all I can say is I had strict reservations on it.

"For me, I always believed that the umpires are there to do a job and even with technology the umpires can do the job. I don't think the players should be involved at all."

There was further support for India's stance from former ICC elite panel umpire Daryl Harper.

In a column penned for the Indian news site mid-day.com this week, the Australian slammed the DRS and its impact on the game.

"It constantly causes consternation and doubt from all sides," Harper said. "If your child had shown similar progress [as the DRS] in the same five-year period at school, you, as a responsible parent, would be finding another school for your child.

"Firstly, you must remember that it is a system operated by humans. Sometimes they forget to reset the system as in the Jonathan Trott dismissal [at Trent Bridge].

"Sometimes, they simply replay the wrong delivery to the third umpire as occurred more than once in the 2011 World Cup.

"If the system was introduced to overcome the howlers, then don't prevent the umpires from saving face when the howler invariably comes.

"Either hand the review controls to the umpires or we'll just have to take it on the chin with this flawed system that resembles a dog's breakfast Despite rumours to the contrary, I support India."